Troubling Double Use of accusative particle wo
hira...@freenet.de
this is once again about the "double use" of を,
I mean the structure noun1をnoun2を followed by a verb.
This comes up from time to time on the list and I hope
someone of you can show me the way out of this labyrinth.
I cannot grasp the meaning of the portion
情報を選択を指示するもの in the following claim:
前記情報提供サービスに係わる情報は、階層構造を有する
情報であり、前記メニューは前記階層構造の各階層の情報を
選択を指示するものであることを特徴とする請求項２記載の
情報提供サービスシステム。
How would you parse this paragraph?
TIA for your kind input,
Uwe Hirayama
hira...@freenet.de
JP2GER Translations
TimL...@aol.com
Marc Adler
> 前記情報提供サービスに係わる情報は、階層構造を有する
> 情報であり、前記メニューは前記階層構造の各階層の情報を
> 選択を指示するものであることを特徴とする請求項２記載の
> 情報提供サービスシステム。
I agree with Tim, unless 選択指示 is used as a verb in the text, in which
the second を could be an editing artifact.
Either way, the phrase makes sense. The menu is for giving an
instruction to select information.
--
Marc Adler
Austin, TX
Gauçac eztira multçutu, eta berretu behar mengoaric, eta premiaric gabe.
Jim Lockhart
> I cannot grasp the meaning of the portion
> 情報を選択を指示するもの in the following claim:
Try parsing it this way:
{情報を選択[すること]}を指示するもの
...instructs [the user?] to select the data for 各階層 [the desired
hierarchy from among the hierarchy-structure choices available?]...
> 前記情報提供サービスに係わる情報は、階層構造を有する
> 情報であり、前記メニューは前記階層構造の各階層の情報を
> 選択を指示するものであることを特徴とする請求項２記載の
> 情報提供サービスシステム。
>
> How would you parse this paragraph?
I wouldn't. Good luck.
--Jim Lockhart
Jim Lockhart
> > 前記情報提供サービスに係わる情報は、階層構造を有する
> > 情報であり、前記メニューは前記階層構造の各階層の情報を
> > 選択を指示するものであることを特徴とする請求項２記載の
> > 情報提供サービスシステム。
>
> I agree with Tim, unless 選択指示 is used as a verb in the text, in which
> the second を could be an editing artifact.
I don't agree. 情報を選択を指示する is the same as 情報を選択することを
指示する, just more concise. I see (and hear, e.g. on the news) this
construction fairly often, so I don't think it's a mistake. (If I'm
wrong on this, someone please correct me.)
> Either way, the phrase makes sense. The menu is for giving an
> instruction to select information.
With this, I agree.
HTH,
--Jim Lockhart
TimL...@aol.com
指示する, just more concise. When I suggested reading the first "wo" as "no",
Marc Adler
> I don't agree. 情報を選択を指示する is the same as 情報を選択することを
> 指示する, just more concise. I see (and hear, e.g. on the news) this
> construction fairly often, so I don't think it's a mistake. (If I'm
> wrong on this, someone please correct me.)
The only case I know when you can have two を's in a row is in an
embedded clause, like "フライパンを脂を落とすように少し持ち上げる," or something. That's
different from this situation, because there's a verb for each を, and
in this situation there's only one verb. I don't think that's
grammatically allowed, simply because without the すること which you added
to make it grammatical, 選択 is a noun, and nouns can't "act" on other
nouns via を.
The fact that the sentence is still parsable and understandable
doesn't make it grammatical, in my view.
TimL...@aol.com
Mika Jz
指示する, just more concise.
Mieko Nishi
This unconventional structure could be a result of
careless editing. I guess the writer has originally written
"情報を選択することを指示するもの" and then thought
it can be made compact, but inadvertently did not replace
the first "を" with "の" after deleting "すること."
It is a fairly common mistake because people today usually
write and cut & paste on the screen. The mistake was very
rare among writers and editors when they used pens/pencils.
> I see (and hear, e.g. on the news) this
> construction fairly often, so I don't think it's a mistake. (If I'm
> wrong on this, someone please correct me.)
similar to the one Mark Adler's example has. I cannot
imargine any sane native Japanese speaker would utter
"情報を選択を指示するもの" becuase those who hear it will
feel lost at the instant. A native reader will immediately
notice something is wrong with that expression, and a
native editor will correct it on the spot he/she finds it.
Mark'ｓ example is in a commonly seen and heard "XをYを"
construction, though a careful writer/editor would avoid
separating the main verb and the main object with an
inserted adverbial phrase if the phrase includes another
verb-object pair or more.
Mieko Nishi
Mark Spahn
This unconventional structure could be a result of
careless editing. I guess the writer has originally written
"情報を選択することを指示するもの" and then thought
it can be made compact, but inadvertently did not replace
the first "を" with "の" after deleting "すること."
It is a fairly common mistake because people today usually
write and cut & paste on the screen. The mistake was very
rare among writers and editors when they used pens/pencils.
Mieko Nishi
Michael Santone
claims. What does the corresponding part say in this section?
Michael
hira...@freenet.de
I am glad that the construction in question
at least is the result of poor writing.
Michael Santone asked:
> The section called 課題を解決するための手段
> is usually just a repetition of the
> claims. What does the corresponding part say in this section?
The 情報を選択を指示するもの is part of a
dependant claim which is not repeated in other
parts of the 明細書.
Best regards,
Uwe Hirayama
hira...@freenet.de
Michael Santone
the menu in question somewhere in the specification that would shed
light on what the writer meant to say in the claim. If there is no
disclosure characterizing this menu anywhere in the specification, the
claim will be rejected the the Examiner because there is an attempt to
claim matter that is not disclosed in the specification.
However, I agree that this is grammatically broken and you have a
right to translate it in a manner that makes sense (maybe with a note
to the client?).
Michael
Jim Lockhart
> > I see (and hear, e.g. on the news) this
> > construction fairly often, so I don't think it's a mistake. (If I'm
> > wrong on this, someone please correct me.)
>
> I bet what Jim Lockhart has heard were in a construction
> similar to the one Mark Adler's example has. I cannot
> imargine any sane native Japanese speaker would utter
> "情報を選択を指示するもの" becuase those who hear it will
> feel lost at the instant.
Actually, thinking about it, I'm not sure that I hear it as much as see
it, for instance in the headline-style captioning on TV news programs.
Otherwise, it seems to appear in situations where space is at a
premium--headlines, table headers, etc.
But I also feel (this is visceral) that I've seen it in prose (perhaps
newspaper articles--I translate a lot of media clippings).
> Mark'ｓ example is in a commonly seen and heard "XをYを"
> construction, though a careful writer/editor would avoid
> separating the main verb and the main object with an
> inserted adverbial phrase if the phrase includes another
> verb-object pair or more.
Indeed.
In English, too, you will often spot usages in prose that normally
should only appear in situations where abbreviations are accepted. It is
indeed due to sloppy (or ignorant) editors/writers.
But since they do appear, translators need to be aware of them and know
how to deal with them.
--Jim Lockhart
Michael Santone
X and Y. For example,
XをAに、YをBに保存する
X is saved in A and Y is saved in B.
I don't see that structure in the example given. Rather for
前記メニューは前記階層構造の各階層の情報を
選択を指示するものである
as suggested above, it makes perfect sense to assume a mistype/
misedit, and correct this to
情報の選択を指示する
On 12月5日, 午後1:16, Jim Lockhart <jamesalockh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 13:37:34 -0800 (PST)
>
Jim Lockhart
> In my experience, in the XをYを construction, there is one verb for both
> X and Y. For example,
>
> XをAに、YをBに保存する
>
> X is saved in A and Y is saved in B.
Yes, I see this too.
> I don't see that structure in the example given. Rather for
>
> 前記メニューは前記階層構造の各階層の情報を
> 選択を指示するものである
What do you read/see/listen to/watch? And now that your attention has
been called to it, maybe you'll start noticing it. I started noticing it,
too, when something called my attention to it. I wish I could remember
what it was--it may have been a sentence in a book on how to edit or
write better Japanese.
> as suggested above, it makes perfect sense to assume a mistype/
> misedit, and correct this to
>
> 情報の選択を指示する
A lot of things make perfect sense. Sometimes jumping off a bridge into
a raging river makes sense.
Although I see no harm in >changing< the を to の as shown here--and
indeed agree that it improves clarity--I disagree with the notion that
one should assume a typo or misedit. Mistake, poor editing,
stream-of-thought writing, or otherwise, the construction appears. Get
used to it.
And whenever I come across an unfamiliar construction, even in English,
I avoid *assuming* anything until I've done some research, including
asking questions here.
--Jim Lockhart @ Sind das Geier die da oben am Himmel rumkreisen?
Michael Santone
My post was not directed towards anyone in particular (not Jim).
I was making a general observation in response to Meiko Nishi's
message rejecting this as correct Japanese (I'm assuming she is a
native speaker). I seem to have clicked the 返信 for Jim's message.
I sometimes don't get a sentence until I have looked at it every-which-
way (especially the prolix sentences of a patent) and have done Google
searches before I see it is in fact grammatical.
Michael
On 12月5日, 午後6:15, Jim Lockhart <jamesalockh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 00:41:05 -0800 (PST)
>
hira...@freenet.de
> Hmm.... I can't help but think that there must be an explanation of
> the menu in question somewhere in the specification that would shed
> light on what the writer meant to say in the claim.
Well, the dependent claim is neither repeated nor rewritten in the
description. However, the description of the working example
(embodiment) sheds some light on what is meant by menu and
layer structure. I append a "brief" summary with more details on this
at the end of this message.
> If there is no
> disclosure characterizing this menu anywhere in the specification, the
> claim will be rejected the the Examiner because there is an attempt to
> claim matter that is not disclosed in the specification.
This may be the case if the applicant wants to obtain a patent, however,
the document that I translate is a laid open patent application from
1994 and the applicant did not proceed to the next step (審査請求 未請求)
Best regards,
Uwe Hirayama
hira...@freenet.de
================
Appendix: more context
The invention relates to an "information providing service system"
in which the users can order information services providing maps
or other kinds of information (e.g. on the traffic situation) from base
stations (speaking more exactly, from data bases provided at the
base stations) using mobile terminals (e.g. mobile phones).
The information sent from the base stations to the mobile terminals
is provided in menu form and the user can select the required
information from the menu using the keys of the cellular phone.
In the embodiment the structure of the information (layer structure)
is explained using map information as an example. At first the user
receives a map covering a wide area (top layer).
The map is divided into sections and the user can select a section
by key operation (e.g. section 4 by pressing the number key "4") if
a map giving more details is required. In this case the base station
will send the map of the section (i.e. the information of the next layer)
selected by the user. This procedure can be repeated so that the
user can go from one layer to the next layer (in the example from
a map with less detailed information to a more detailed map).
Eric Tschetter
bit about whether this was a nit worth picking, but I am wondering what
sort of discussion it might generate and thus decided to write this
message. I also do not mean to be picking on Jim, but I'm pretty sure
he can handle it <g>.
>> 前記情報提供サービスに係わる情報は、階層構造を有する
>> 情報であり、前記メニューは前記階層構造の各階層の情報を
>> 選択を指示するものであることを特徴とする請求項２記載の
>> 情報提供サービスシステム。
First, I would like to say that aside from the double を construction, I
do not think the word 指示 means "instruct" in this context. That is to
say, I read it more as 示す than as 指図する, i.e. it is something
synonymous with 表示 or 提示 . Of course, as Michael stated, a quick
read through the description of the patent (specifically, what exactly
this "menu" does) would quickly lend credibility to/debunk this theory.
However, given that this メニュー is most likely referring to something
similar to the File, Edit, View, etc. menus, I find it hard to imagine a
context where the menu would be "instructing" the user to select
something. On the other hand, I can imagine that the purpose of the
menu is to show the user each subsequent layer of some hierarchically
order data. I.e., I am operating under the assumption that this menu
basically gives the user a bunch of options with an arrow off to the
right. When you hover over an option, it opens up another box to the
right with all the sub-options, and continues in that manner until there
are no more sub-options.
> {情報を選択[すること]}を指示するもの
>
> ...instructs [the user?] to select the data for 各階層 [the desired
> hierarchy from among the hierarchy-structure choices available?]...
Now, given the assumption above, I actually cannot see how this can be
parsed by adding in a "すること." Or, perhaps I should say that adding
a すること creates a different meaning than replacing the first を with
a の. Specifically speaking, adding すること causes 指示 to mean 指図す
る, i.e. I see no other interpretation than
前記メニューは各階層の情報を選択することを指示するもの →
前記メニューは「ここで次の階層の情報を選択するんだよ」と指図をするもの →
The purpose of the menu is to instruct the user to select something
Whereas changing を to の keeps the ability (and actually probability)
of 指示 meaning simply to display or show, i.e.
前記メニューは各階層の情報の選択を指示するもの →
前記メニューは各階層の情報の選択[肢]を指示（列挙・表示）するもの →
The purpose of the menu is to hierarchically display said data.
In other words, it seems to me that the addition of すること to the
structure actually takes the focus away from 選択 referring to the
possible selections (i.e. a noun) and forces it to be read as a verb.
This causes the object of 指示 to become すること rather than 選択,
which ultimately results in a change of context that switches the
meaning of 指示 from display to instruct.
With all of that said, I am not saying that seemingly weird double を's
do not exist in the wild. I am fairly certain I have seen them as well.
What I am trying to say is that, in this case, I do not believe you
can insert a すること and still retain the "proper" meaning. I think
that this double を was created because it was originally simply 各階層
の情報を選択する[ための]もの but, for whatever reason, they decide to
change it to 各階層の情報の選択を指示するもの and overlooked the first を.
I admit that my declaration of the "proper" meaning is not based on the
document context. It is based on my knowledge of computer science and
that the claim sounds to me like a software-related patent. I also just
noticed Uwe's message and now feel even more confident in my analysis.
Thoughts, disagreements?
--Eric Tschetter
er...@nii.ac.jp
Tom Donahue
> I find it hard to imagine a
> context where the menu would be "instructing" the user to select
> something.
Me too, so isn't it the user instructing the system to select
something?
FWIW I agree with the typo or editing artifact camp.
の を would be more grammatical. But semantically the
writer has two objects 情報を選択 and 選択を指示.
Whether it's grammatical or not, that's what it means.
As to how you get there, I don't think it makes any
difference to the translation.
I guess this means I also agree with Jim. Pretend it's
grammatical and just do it ;)
--
Tom Donahue
Mika Jz
> --Eric Tschetter
I disagree.
That was not a nit.
It was setting the record straight; a bit long winded, but a very valid
argument in the right direction.
> > {情報を選択[すること]}を指示するもの
> >
> > ...instructs [the user?] to select the data for 各階層 [the desired
> > hierarchy from among the hierarchy-structure choices available?]...
>
> Now, given the assumption above, I actually cannot see how
> this can be
> parsed by adding in a "すること."
Me neither. 指示する here is 指し示す.
Not sure if it's a correct usage, but the readers get it.
Good job, Eric.
As for the double を, it's an editing artifact.
Persuade me otherwise if you can, but don't waste our time.
Eric Tschetter
Tom Donahue wrote:
> Eric Tschetter writes:
>
>> I find it hard to imagine a
>> context where the menu would be "instructing" the user to select
>> something.
>
> Me too, so isn't it the user instructing the system to select
> something?
I believe the Japanese would have to be different for the user to become
the subject of the phrase/sentence. Specifically, if it said
前記メニューは各階層の情報の選択を指示するためのもの
then it would definitely be the user doing the 指示, but with it saying
前記メニューはXXXを指示するもの, the "もの" (i.e. the menu) becomes the
subject of the adjectival phrase that ends with the verb 指示する. Even
if you try to put ユーザが into the sentence as is, it just kinda sounds
weird to me:
前記メニューはユーザが各階層の情報の選択を指示するもの
One of those "I think I know what it is saying but am not sure"
situations. Of course, I am not a native and that could be perfectly
"good" Japanese...
> FWIW I agree with the typo or editing artifact camp.
> の を would be more grammatical. But semantically the
> writer has two objects 情報を選択 and 選択を指示.
> Whether it's grammatical or not, that's what it means.
> As to how you get there, I don't think it makes any
> difference to the translation.
Well, my point was probably more that 選択を指示 and 選択することを指示
are not necessarily the same thing.
> I guess this means I also agree with Jim. Pretend it's
> grammatical and just do it ;)
I'm not disagreeing with that point =).
--Eric Tschetter
er...@nii.ac.jp
Mark Spahn
Mika Jz
情報であり、前記メニューは前記階層構造の各階層の
情報提供サービスシステム。
Tom Donahue
> ○情報の選択を指示するもの は、
> △情報を選択するよう指示するもの
> と同義であるとも解釈できますので、それなら
> ちょうどMarkさんが言われたように二重の意味を
> 持つことになりますね。どうでしょう？
Well, I guess it is possible, but it seems like kind of a
far-fetched interpretation of 指示.
You guys (the Tschetterians) are looking at the front
end of the menu. It is a mechanism for displaying (指示)
options (選択) and prompting （指示） the user to choose one.
I am looking at the back end. The system is a system for
providing information. Before it can provide information,
it has to select it. The menu is a mechanism for instructing
(指示) the system to select (選択) information (情報).
Say the user wants the information for Montana. Before
the system can provide it, it has to rummage through its
hierarchical information structure and select the box or
whatever that contains the information for Montana.
Isn't this what patents are supposed to do? Explain the
inner workings of the system?
Not that I have a lot of confidence in this. We're dealing with
a typo or artifact here, and I have been known in the past
to construct castle-in-the-sand theories to take a typo
at its word.
--
Tom Donahue
Marc Adler
> I am looking at the back end. The system is a system for
> providing information. Before it can provide information,
> it has to select it. The menu is a mechanism for instructing
> (指示) the system to select (選択) information (情報).
I agree with this, but I'll add that, as I mentioned before, I've
often seen 指示 used superfluously in patents, especially in combination
with something like 選択, so I wouldn't fall out of my chair if I found
out that the editing artifact in this case was the を between 選択 and
指示. In cases where you have things like 選択指示, you can often just
ignore the 指示, because the 選択 /is/ a 指示, so the 指示 is technically
pleonastic.
Indeed, if you get rid of the 指示 altogether from the English, you wind
up with something that sounds a lot more like English:
...前記メニューは前記階層構造の各階層の情報を選択を指示するものである...
...the menu being for selecting data at each level in the hierarchical
structure...
I know that's too much for the literal-minded, including some clients,
in which case 指示する can be neatly rendered "to give an instruction."
This would result in...
...the menu being for giving instructions for selecting data at each
level in the hierarchical structure...
Note that in both cases, a situation in which the user is giving
instructions (and the menu is just a means) is not excluded. The
Japanese is ambiguous with regards to this, so the English should be,
too.